Last Call Review of draft-ietf-bess-fat-pw-bgp-03
review-ietf-bess-fat-pw-bgp-03-genart-lc-dupont-2018-02-14-00

Request Review of draft-ietf-bess-fat-pw-bgp
Requested rev. no specific revision (document currently at 04)
Type Last Call Review
Team General Area Review Team (Gen-ART) (genart)
Deadline 2018-02-09
Requested 2018-01-26
Other Reviews Rtgdir Telechat review of -03 by Tomonori Takeda (diff)
Opsdir Last Call review of -03 by Mahesh Jethanandani (diff)
Secdir Last Call review of -03 by Scott Kelly (diff)
Review State Completed
Reviewer Francis Dupont
Review review-ietf-bess-fat-pw-bgp-03-genart-lc-dupont-2018-02-14
Posted at https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/gen-art/RAVuJbL1QbV9E9U2rH4WMEcJaqI
Reviewed rev. 03 (document currently at 04)
Review result Ready
Draft last updated 2018-02-14
Review completed: 2018-02-14

Review
review-ietf-bess-fat-pw-bgp-03-genart-lc-dupont-2018-02-14

I am the assigned Gen-ART reviewer for this draft. The General Area
Review Team (Gen-ART) reviews all IETF documents being processed
by the IESG for the IETF Chair.  Please treat these comments just
like any other last call comments.

For more information, please see the FAQ at

<https://trac.ietf.org/trac/gen/wiki/GenArtfaq>.

Document: draft-ietf-bess-fat-pw-bgp-03.txt
Reviewer: Francis Dupont
Review Date: 2018/02/07
IETF LC End Date: 20180209
IESG Telechat date: unknown

Summary: Ready

Major issues: None

Minor issues: None

Nits/editorial comments: 
 - Abstract page 1: please expand PE abbrev

 - PoC page 2 and 4 page 7: Acknowledgements -> Acknowledgments

 - 1 page 3: please introduce PE abbrev (it is not marked as well known
  in https://www.rfc-editor.org/materials/abbrev.expansion.txt, and
  Abstract and body are independent so an abbrev introduced in the Abstract
  should be introduced again in the body).

 - 1 page 3: ECMP is introduced twice (better than none :-).

 - 1 page 3: This draft -> This document (or specification ot ...).
  The RFC Editor should update this prior to the publication but
  making its job harder is not a good idea. So if you have another
  reason to update the document please fix this...

 -  1.1 page 4: RFC 2119 was updated by RFC 8174

 - 3 page 6: e.g. -> e.g.,

 - 3 page 7: i.e. -> i.e., (at end of line)

Regards

Francis.Dupont@fdupont.fr